Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 8, 2024

Zanabria v. Gourmet Tech Corp

Judge
Ona Wang
Docket
1:23-cv-09479
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Zanabria v. Gourmet Tech Corp, Judge Ramos directed the parties to submit their settlement for court approval after mediation.

Who this affects

The named plaintiffs, the proposed similarly situated group, and all named defendants were affected because the court directed the parties to submit their agreement for approval.

What happened

In Zanabria v. Gourmet Tech Corp, Enrique Zanabria, Wilmer Velasco, and the defendants told the court that they had agreed on all issues after mediation.

The court directed the parties to submit their agreement for approval under the governing Second Circuit settlement-review decision by January 22, 2024.

Judge Ramos issued the order on January 8, 2024; the opinion does not state that the court approved the agreement or entered final judgment.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Zanabria v. Gourmet Tech Corp · No. 1:23-cv-09479
Judge
Ona Wang
Date
Jan. 8, 2024

Background

Enrique Zanabria and Wilmer Velasco brought the case on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated against Gourmet Tech Corp doing business as Marche Madison, Madison Gourmet Ltd doing business as Marche Madison, Kim Kyung Ho, and Jeffrey Kim. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.

Ruling

The court stated that it had been advised that the parties reached an agreement on all issues after mediation. It directed the parties to submit their agreement for court approval under Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., 796 F.3d 199 (2d Cir. 2015), by January 22, 2024. The opinion does not state that the court approved the agreement, denied approval, or entered final judgment.

Effect

This order required the parties to submit the settlement agreement for review. It did not decide the underlying claims in the text provided.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.